Discussion in 'Entertainment Xtra' started by peter1000, Feb 12, 2019.
saw this guy thought it was worth passing on
A dodgy test in the frontal comparison with belted and non belted dummies.
The non belted hit a half height barrier and body deformation was considerably different as a result.
Also I would question claims of minor injuries just because of cabin structural integrity.
Even at 60 km / hr there can be high loads on parts of body that impact on interior.
Monash university did numerous tests in the 80's that rated each area accurately.
One series of tests resulted in improvements in roof support when it was shown that no Australian built car of the era could support itself in the event if a rollover.
Despite my anti " big brother" disposition I am a great believer in active seat belts and airbags.
Death from head injuries where the person is properly restrained but the head flays around striking hard internal surfaces can happen at quite low speeds.
Energy is dissipated by striking the airbag first.
Worthwhile video tho.
Imagine the results when someone bogs a rusty pillar or sill. ??
Pity there’s no equivalent footage for bay or splits.
Can’t imagine it was a manufacturers requirement then...
Reckon that would be scary viewing
Not as scary as the damage to that US tank
US Limosine = 2 doors? I'd like to see trump in that!
The rollover tests are bit obscure. Most real rollovers tend to have some diagonal motion in the first roll which crushes the A pillar in rather than a perfect 90 degree square rollover.
Bays pretty good in frontals despite our thoughts. That solid splayed front chassis is good at its job of disseminating energy.
Late bays have similar front end deformation framing to the T3s but the early bays - especially pre 70 have bugger all.
As they say - never wipe the bugs off the front as they act as a cushioning in the event of a head on crash
Separate names with a comma.